The effect of budesonide-formoterol powder inhalation on cough and lung function following thoracoscopic pulmonary surgery: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore whether portable budesonide-formoterol powder inhalation can ameliorate cough symptoms and improve pulmonary function recovery in patients who underwent thoracoscopic lung surgery. METHODS: Clinical data of patients who underwent thoracoscopic pulmonary resection at Henan Provincial People's Hospital between December 2022 and May 2023 were extracted. To evaluate the impact of continuous post-operative use of portable budesonide-formoterol powder inhalation, patients were divided into two groups: the control group and the case group. Next, we compared the Leicester cough score and pulmonary function indexes of the patients before surgery, one month and six month after the operation. RESULTS: A total of 188 cases were included, and the baseline demographic characteristics of both groups were well-balanced. The internal consistency of the LCQ-MC scale, as indicated by Cronbach's α coefficients, were all greater than 0.8, and there was no significant difference in LCQ-MC scores between the two groups before the operation (Z=-1.173, P=0.241). Postoperatively, the LCQ-MC score in the case group was significantly higher than that in the control group (18.66 vs. 16.79, P<0.01), with a notable statistically significant difference in the reduction of LCQ-MC scores between the two groups (1.32 vs. 3.30, P<0.01). Analysis of lung function revealed that patients in the case group exhibited significant improvements in FEV1/FVC, FVC, FEV1, PEF, MMEF75/25, MVV, DLCO and the RV/TLC indexes compared to the control group (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Portable budesonide-formoterol powder inhalation can alleviate cough symptoms and promote pulmonary function recovery in patients following thoracoscopic lung surgery.

Comparative Efficacy of Budesonide/Formoterol Versus Fluticasone/Salmeterol in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of budesonide/formoterol (BF) versus fluticasone/salmeterol (FS) in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched for studies comparing BF versus FS in the treatment of COPD from inception to July 17, 2023. Outcomes, including exacerbations, hospitalizations, pneumonia, emergency department (ED) visits for COPD, length of hospitalization, and number of exacerbations, were compared using risk ratio (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) or weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CI. All statistical analyses were performed using Stata version 12.0. RESULTS: Ten studies comprising a total of 136,369 participants were included. Compared with those treated with FS, patients with COPD treated with BF experienced a reduced number of exacerbations (RR 0.91 [95% CI 0.83-1.00]; p = 0.040), hospitalizations (RR 0.77 [95% CI 0.67-0.88]; p < 0.001), and frequency of pneumonia (RR 0.77 [95% CI 0.64-0.92]; p = 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed between BF and FS in terms of ED visits for COPD (RR 0.87 [95% CI 0.69-1.10]; p = 0.243), length of hospitalization (WMD -0.18 [95% CI -0.62-0.27]; p = 0.437), and number of exacerbations (WMD -0.06 [95% CI -0.28-0.16]; p = 0.602). Notably, no significant heterogeneity was noted in length of hospitalization between the two groups, whereas clear heterogeneity was observed in other outcomes (I2 > 50%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Compared with FS, BF therapy appears to be a more promising treatment strategy for patients with moderate-to-severe COPD; however, this should be verified in further high-quality studies.

Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy in childhood asthma: Real-world effectiveness and economic assessment.

INTRODUCTION: The study aims to compare the real-world effectiveness and economy of the budesonide/formoterol reliever and maintenance therapy (SMART) with fixed-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)/long-acting b-agonist (LABA) or ICS alone plus as-needed, short-acting ß2 agonists (SABA) in pediatric patients. METHODS: The outpatient data warehouse of a hospital in China was used. A total of 103 patients under 18 years old in the SMART group and 63 patients in the control group were included from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021. The effectiveness was assessed using asthma attacks and lung function at baseline, 6 months and 12 months follow-up. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed with a three-state Markov model from the healthcare system perspective. One-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to check the robustness of the results. RESULTS: The SMART regimen was more effective than other strategies in reducing the risk of mild and severe attacks in the real-life management of childhood asthma. Patients in both groups showed significant improvement in lung function at 6 and 12 months in contrast to baseline. Compared with other strategies, the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1 ) level in the SMART group was markedly improved at 6 months. The total cost of outpatient service using the SMART regimen was lower than that of other strategies, while the drug costs were similar in different groups. Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis results showed that using the SMART regimen reduced the total cost by approximately CNY 10,516.11 per year with a 0.12 quality-adjusted life year (QALYs) increase. Sensitive analyses supported that the SMART regimen was the dominant choice at the willingness-to-pay threshold of CNY 85,698, per capita GDP in China. CONCLUSIONS: Collectively, our findings indicate that the real-world effectiveness and economy of the SMART regimen are superior to the traditional strategies in pediatric asthma patients.

Effect of budesonide formoterol combined with tiotropium bromide on pulmonary function and inflammatory factors in patients with asthma-COPD overlap syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical efficacy of combining budesonide formoterol with tiotropium bromide for treating asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap syndrome (AOCS). METHODS: The data of 104 patients with AOCS admitted to our hospital from December 2019 to December 2020 were assessed, randomly and divided into an experimental group (comprising 52 patients, receiving drug combination therapy) and a conventional group (comprising 52 patients, receiving drug therapy alone). Patients' clinical efficacy, pulmonary function, fractioned exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), immune function, endothelial function, serum lipid peroxidation injury indexes, adverse reactions, and quality of life scores were compared. RESULTS: Prior to treatment, no significant differences were observed in various pulmonary function indicators, FeNO, immune function, endothelial function, and lipid peroxidation injury indexes between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, after treatment, all observation indexes in both groups improved to different levels, with the experimental group -demonstrating -significantly superior improvement, compared to the conventional group (P < 0.05). We also observed that adverse reactions in the experimental group were significantly lower than in the conventional group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The combination of budesonide formoterol to tiotropium bromide in treating asthma-COPD overlap syndrome may significantly improve pulmonary function, endothelial function, and immune status of patients and encourage the recovery of serum lipid peroxidation injury; therefore, this may deserve widespread adoption and application.

Effects of omalizumab combined with budesonide formoterol on clinical efficacy, pulmonary function, immune function, and adverse reactions in children with moderate and severe allergic asthma.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of combining omalizumab with budesonide formoterol to treat children with moderate and severe allergic asthma, and investigate the effect of this combination therapy on pulmonary and immune functions. METHODS: The data of 88 children with moderate and severe allergic asthma, who were admitted to our hospital between July 2021 and July 2022, were included in the study. The patients were randomly assigned either to control group (n = 44; received budesonide formoterol inhalation therapy) or experimental group (n = 44; received omalizumab subcutaneous injection + budesonide formoterol inhalation therapy) using computer-generated randomization. The clinical efficacy, asthma control (measured using childhood Asthma-Control Test [C-ACT] score), pulmonary function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s, forced vital capacity, and peak expiratory flow), immune function (cluster of differentiation 3 cells [CD3+ cells], cluster of differentiation 4 cells [CD4+ cells], immunoglobulin G, immunoglobulin A, and immunoglobulin E), and adverse reactions were observed and compared between both groups. RESULTS: After treatment, the experimental group had improved levels of pulmonary function and immune function indexes, higher C-ACT scores, and a higher overall response rate than the control group (P < 0.05). In addition, the incidence of adverse reactions was not significantly different between both groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The combination of omalizumab with budesonide formoterol for treating moderate and severe allergic asthma in children demonstrated promising clinical efficacy and improved their pulmonary and immune functions, leading to more rational asthma control. The combined regimen demonstrated satisfactory clinical safety and deserved clinical promotion.

Bronchodilator responsiveness testing with inhaled budesonide/formoterol in asthma.

BACKGROUND: The choice of bronchodilators for responsiveness testing (BRT) is a clinical decision according to ATS/ERS. Since January 2019 we use budesonide/formoterol for BRT in asthma at our center in Argentina. The aim was to compare budesonide/formoterol with salbutamol for BRT in stable asthmatic patients that were followed up in a short-acting beta2 agonist (SABA)-free asthma center. METHODS: From the Hospital database, we found for the same patient at least one BRT using salbutamol 200 µg and another with budesonide/formoterol 320/9 µg. RESULTS: We found similar BRT between salbutamol and budesonide/formoterol in 101 asthmatic individuals (26 males) aged 38.14 ± 16.1 yrs (mean ± Standard deviation). The absolute response was 0.18 ± 0.21 L in FEV1 after salbutamol and 0.20 ± 0.22 L in FEV1 after budesonide/formoterol. Afterwards, we showed 202 patients tested with budesonide/formoterol; the mean absolute response was 0.21 ± 0.22 L in FEV1. There were no unexpected safety findings. CONCLUSIONS: In asthmatic patients, we demonstrated similar efficacy between Budesonide/formoterol and salbutamol for BRT.

Effectiveness of budesonide formoterol fixed-dose combination MDI in reducing cough symptoms in COVID-19 patients: A real-world evidence study.

Background: Cough is a wearisome and exasperating symptom affecting the daily life of the infected patient. Cough due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes excessive morbidity in human populations globally. Apart from the morbidity associated with cough, it also enhances the transmission of this viral infection through droplets. Therefore, curbing cough is crucial to limit its spread. Patients often administer over-the-counter products and antitussive agents, which have no proven benefit. The present study was undertaken to find out if cough associated with COVID-19 and other indicative clinical outcomes is alleviated with a budesonide/formoterol fixed-dose combination (FDC) metered-dose inhaler (MDI). Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in mild COVID-19 patients who presented with a cough score ≥8 at presentation. Patients who were initiated on ICS-LABA MDI were observed as group A and those who were not initiated on MDI were observed as Group B. Cough symptom score (at baseline and on day 3 and day 7), the incidence of hospital admission and/or death, and need for mechanical ventilation were documented. Prescribing patterns of anti-cough medications were also noted and analysed. Results: Compared to group B, a higher mean cough score reduction was noted for group A patients at day 3 and day 7 when compared to the baseline, and this was significant at P < 0.001. A significant negative correlation was also observed between mean latency of MDI initiation from the symptom onset and mean cough score reduction. Analysis of the proportion of patients prescribed medications to treat cough showed that overall, 10.78% did not require these, with a greater proportion in group A compared to group B. Conclusion: Patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) COVID-19 who were treated with ICS-LABA MDI along with usual care benefitted significantly in terms of symptom reduction compared to usual care.

Safety and Effectiveness of As-Needed Formoterol in Asthma Patients Taking Inhaled Corticosteroid (ICS)-Formoterol or ICS-Salmeterol Maintenance Therapy.

BACKGROUND: As-needed low-dose inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-formoterol reliever is recommended in patients with asthma prescribed maintenance ICS-formoterol. Clinicians often ask whether ICS-formoterol reliever can be used with other maintenance ICS-long-acting ß2-agonists. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of as-needed formoterol in patients taking maintenance ICS-formoterol or ICS-salmeterol from the RELIEF study. METHODS: RELIEF (SD-037-0699) was a 6-month, open-label study that randomized 18,124 patients with asthma to as-needed formoterol 4.5 µg or salbutamol 200 µg on top of maintenance therapy. This post hoc analysis included patients on maintenance ICS-formoterol or ICS-salmeterol (n = 5436). The primary safety outcome was a composite of serious adverse events (SAEs) and/or adverse events leading to discontinuation (DAEs); the primary effectiveness outcome was time-to-first exacerbation. RESULTS: For both maintenance groups and both relievers, similar numbers of patients had ≥1 SAE and/or DAE. In patients taking maintenance ICS-salmeterol, but not ICS-formoterol, significantly more non-asthma-related and nonserious DAEs occurred with as-needed formoterol versus as-needed salbutamol (P = .0066 and P = .0034, respectively). In patients taking maintenance ICS-formoterol, there was a significantly lower risk in time-to-first exacerbation with as-needed formoterol versus as-needed salbutamol (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70, 0.95; P = .007). In patients taking ICS-salmeterol maintenance, time-to-first exacerbation was not significantly different between treatment arms (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.84, 1.06; P = .35). CONCLUSIONS: As-needed formoterol significantly reduced exacerbation risk compared with as-needed salbutamol when added to maintenance ICS-formoterol, but not to maintenance ICS-salmeterol. More DAEs were seen with ICS-salmeterol maintenance therapy plus as-needed formoterol. Further research is needed to assess whether this is relevant to as-needed combination ICS-formoterol.

Quantitative CT Metrics for the Prediction of Therapeutic Effect in Asthma.

Background: Few studies have explored the correlation between asthma medication and features on HRCT images. We aim to analyse the differences and temporal changes of lung function and airway resistance in asthma with diverse HRCT phenotypes in a short period after inhalation of budesonide/formoterol. Method: This observational study recruited 55 adult patients with varying severities of asthma. We performed detailed airway metrics measurements of chest CT scans, such as airway wall thickness (WT), wall area percentage (WA%), wall thickness percentage (T/OR), and airways with an inner perimeter of 10 mm (Pi10). The effect of lung structural features on asthma medication response was explored according to the WA% and T/OR twelve hours post-drug administration. Using multivariable regression models, we then assessed the influence of WA% on lung function. Results: WA% (p < 0.001) and T/OR (p < 0.001) significantly increased in asthma than in healthy control subjects. Compared to mild asthma, airway walls were further thickened (WA%, p = 0.023; T/OR: p = 0.029) and associated with lumen narrowing (Pi10, p = 0.055) in moderate to severe asthma. WA% and T/OR correlated well with lung function (FEV1, FVC, MMEF, and PEF) and airway resistance (R5, R20, Rp, and Fres). Regression analysis showed that MEF25 decreased with increasing age and WA% (R2 = 0.58, p < 0.001). Patients with thickened airway walls experienced a maximal increase in FVC, FEV1, and PEF at 2 h (p < 0.001) and a maximal decrease of R5, Z5, and Rp at 2 h (p < 0.001) in those with a thickened airway pattern. Conclusions: Asthma patients with different bronchial wall thicknesses exhibited variable lung function changes. Specifically, patients with thick airway wall patterns were more sensitive to inhaled budesonide in the short term.

Comparison of three alternatives for the management of moderate asthma in children aged 6-11 years: a cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent asthma guidelines for children 6-11 years with persistent asthma advocate three alternatives: SMART (budesonide/formoterol 80/4.5 mcg qd plus additional doses as needed), fixed combination of budesonide/formoterol, and fixed-dose budesonide. Concerns have arisen as to which of the proposed alternatives has the best possible cost-effectiveness profile. This study aimed to assess the health and economic consequences of SMART, fixed combination, and fixed-dose budesonide therapy in children 6-11 years old with persistent asthma. METHODS: A probabilistic Markov model was created to estimate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of patients with persistent asthma. Total costs and QALYs of SMART, fixed combination, and fixed-dose budesonide therapy were calculated over a time horizon of 6 years. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The mean QALY per patient was 0.57 and 0.56 QALYs per patient per year of SMART and fixed combination and 0,52 with fixed-dose budesonide. The total mean of discounted costs per patient per cycle were US$111 for SMART, US$133 for fixed combination, and US$67 for fixed-dose budesonide. The net monetary benefit of SMART was US$12,549, US$12278 for fixed combination, and US$11,380 for fixed-dose budesonide. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that SMART was more cost-effective than fixed combination and fixed-dose budesonide. These findings complement and support the GINA 2021 and National Asthma Education and Prevention Program asthma guideline recommendations for use of inhaled corticosteroids-formoterol in children 6-11 years old with persistent asthma.

Effectiveness and quality of life in asthmatic patients treated with budesonide/formoterol via Elpenhaler® device in primary care. The "SKIRON" real world study.

Aim: Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting ß2 agonist (LABA) combination therapy is used for the effective control of asthma. Aim of this study was to collect data on the effectiveness, safety, quality of life, and patient satisfaction from a fixed dose combination of budesonide/formoterol administered with the Elpenhaler® device following 3-months' treatment.Methods: A 3-month real-life, multicentre, one-arm, prospective observational study (SKIRON study-NCT03055793) was conducted, using the following questionnaires: Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-6) for asthma control assessment, MiniAQLQ questionnaire for QoL assessment, and Feeling of Satisfaction with Inhaler questionnaire (FSI-10) for patients' satisfaction with the inhaler device. Comorbidities and safety data were also recorded during the study.Results: We enrolled 1,174 asthmatic patients following standard clinical practice in primary care from 126 sites in urban and rural areas of Greece. The majority of patients (71.5%) had at least one comorbidity. A statistically significant improvement in the ACQ-6 score was noted at 3 months compared to the baseline evaluation (mean ± SD 2.19 ± 0.97 at baseline vs. 0.55 ± 0.56 at 3 months; mean change -1.64 (95%CI -1.69, -1.57), p < 0.0001). MiniAQLQ score was statistically and clinically significantly improved, compared to baseline, (4.55 ± 1.04 at baseline vs. 6.37 ± 0.64 at 3 months; mean change 1.82 (95%CI 1.75, 1.87), p < 0.0001). The mean FSI-10 score of 44.2 ± 5.4 indicated patient satisfaction and ease-of-use of the Elpenhaler® device.Conclusions: In this large real-world study of inadequately-controlled asthma patients in primary care settings, the treatment with budesonide/formoterol FDC with the Elpenhaler® device was associated with significant improvement in patients' asthma control and quality of life.

Effect of budesonide formoterol combined with tiotropium bromide on pulmonary function and inflammatory factors in patients with asthma–COPD overlap syndrome

Objective: To investigate the clinical efficacy of combining budesonide formoterol with tiotropium bromide for treating asthma–chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap syndrome (AOCS). Methods: The data of 104 patients with AOCS admitted to our hospital from December 2019 to December 2020 were assessed, randomly and divided into an experimental group (comprising 52 patients, receiving drug combination therapy) and a conventional group (comprising 52 patients, receiving drug therapy alone). Patients’ clinical efficacy, pulmonary function, fractioned exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), immune function, endothelial function, serum lipid peroxidation injury indexes, adverse reactions, and quality of life scores were compared. Results: Prior to treatment, no significant differences were observed in various pulmonary function indicators, FeNO, immune function, endothelial function, and lipid peroxidation injury indexes between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, after treatment, all observation indexes in both groups improved to different levels, with the experimental group -demonstrating -significantly superior improvement, compared to the conventional group (P < 0.05). We also observed that adverse reactions in the experimental group were significantly lower than in the conventional group (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The combination of budesonide formoterol to tiotropium bromide in treating asthma–COPD overlap syndrome may significantly improve pulmonary function, endothelial function, and immune status of patients and encourage the recovery of serum lipid peroxidation injury; therefore, this may deserve widespread adoption and application (AU)

Consultas a urgencia y valores espirométricos tras el reemplazo de salmeterol/fluticasona por budesonida/formoterol en pacientes con asma moderada a grave / Emergency consultations and spirometric values after replacement of salmeterol/fluticasone with budesonide/formoterol in patients with moderate to severe asthma

El asma se caracteriza por su impacto deletéreo que incluye gran coste económico para el sistema de salud. En pacientes con asma mal controlada a pesar del tratamiento, se propone un régimen de mantenimiento con corticoides inhalados y formoterol. El objetivo del presente estudio observacional retrospectivo fue evaluar las modificaciones espirométricas tras el cambio del medicamento controlador en pacientes con asma moderada a severa asistidos en el Hospital Clínico de Magallanes de Punta Arenas, así como también cuantificar la modificación en el número de exacerbaciones graves (consulta a un servicio de urgencia y/u hospitalización por asma). Participaron 61 adultos con asma moderada a severa (mediana de edad: 60 años [rango: 21-87], mujeres: 69,4%; comorbilidad atópica/alérgica: 79%; otras comorbilidades: 46,8%) en los que se cambió el tratamiento con fluticasona/salmeterol 250/25 μg por budesónida/formoterol 160/4,5 μg. No se observaron cambios significativos en los índices espirométricos tras el cambio. Con el tratamiento inicial, el 46,9% presentó ≥ 1 visita a urgencias (total: 50 consultas). Tras el cambio por budesonida/formoterol, el 21% requirió al menos una visita a urgencias (total: 14 consultas; p < 0,01). La proporción de pacientes con ≥ 2 consultas a urgencias fue de 19,7% con el tratamiento basal y de 1,6% tras el cambio a budesonida/formoterol (p < 0,01). No se observaron diferencias significativas en la cantidad de hospitalizaciones. En este estudio del mundo real de pacientes con asma moderada a grave, el cambio del tratamiento a budesonida/formoterol se asoció con reducción significativa de las consultas a urgencias, a pesar de no detectarse cambios de significación estadística en los índices espirométricos habituales.

Asthma is characterized by its deleterious impact, including a high cost to the healthcare system. In patients with poorly controlled asthma despite treatment, a maintenance regimen of inhaled corticosteroids and formoterol is proposed. The aim of this retrospective, observational study was to evaluate the spirometric changes after switching the controller medication in patients with moderate to severe asthma attended in our institution ("Hospital Clínico de Magallanes"), as well as the variation in the number of severe exacerbations (consultation to an emergency department and/or hospitalization for asthma). Sixty-one adults with moderate to severe asthma (median age: 60 years-old [range: 21-87], women: 69.4%; atopic/allergic comorbidity: 79%; other comorbidities: 46.8%) in whom treatment with fluticasone/salmeterol 250/25 μg was switched to budesonide/formoterol 160/4.5 μg participated in our study. No significant changes in spirometric parameters were observed after the replacement treatment. With the initial treatment, 46.9% patients presented ≥ 1 visit to the emergency department (total: 50 visits). After the switch to budesonide/formoterol, 21% required at least one emergency department visit (total: 14 consultations; p < 0.01). The proportion of patients with ≥ 2 emergency department visits was 19.7% with baseline treatment and 1.6% after switching to budesonide/formoterol (p < 0.01). No significant differences were observed in the number of hospitalizations. In this real-world study of moderate to severe asthma patients, switching to budesonide/formoterol was associated with a significant reduction in emergency department visits, despite no statistically significant changes in the usual spirometric parameters.

Response to Omalizumab as an Add-On Therapy in the Treatment of Allergic Asthma in Adult Chinese Patients-A Retrospective Study.

(a) Background: Omalizumab is an anti-IgE humanized monoclonal antibody marketed in China for the conventional treatment of poorly controlled moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. Numerous clinical trials have demonstrated the effectiveness of omalizumab, but the data from studies in actual clinical treatment are still relatively limited. (b) Methods: Thirty-two patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma treated with omalizumab on the basis of ICS-LABA (inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting beta2-agonist) were selected. Clinical characteristics before and after treatment were collected to analyze the relationship between changes in serum total IgE levels and peripheral blood EOS (eosinophil) levels, FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in 1 second), PEF (peak expiratory flow), OCS (oral glucocorticoid) dosage, ATC (asthma control test) score, and the number of acute exacerbations and the treatment response, in order to observe the efficacy of omalizumab in addition to primary therapy, and to investigate whether baseline clinical characteristics such as serum total IgE and EOS levels could predict a treatment response. (c) Results: Using the ACT score as an evaluation, 68.75% of patients benefited from omalizumab treatment at the end of 16 weeks. The response group has a reduction in OCS dosage (p-values of 0.026 and 0.039), a significant reduction in ACT scores (both p < 0.001), and a reduction in the number of acute exacerbations (p = 0.034 and 0.025, respectively) after omalizumab treatment. The binary logistics analysis of factors affecting the effectiveness of omalizumab in the treatment of allergic asthma were total serum IgE and the presence of comorbidities (p-values of 0.039 and 0.046, respectively). (d) Conclusions: Combining omalizumab with ICS-LABA for 16 weeks significantly improves asthma symptoms in Chinese adults and can be used as an add-on treatment. In addition, high serum IgE levels and the presence of comorbidities were predictors of its therapeutic efficacy.

Effects of treatment with montelukast alone, budesonide/formoterol alone and a combination of both in cough variant asthma.

BACKGROUND: Whether cysteinyl-leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) have a similar antitussive effect to inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting ß2-agonist (ICS/LABA), and that LTRA plus ICS/LABA is superior to LTRAs alone or ICS/LABA alone in treating cough variant asthma (CVA) remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate and compare the efficacy of montelukast alone, budesonide/formoterol alone and the combination of both in the treatment of CVA. METHODS: Ninety-nine CVA patients were assigned randomly in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive montelukast (M group: 10 mg, once daily), budesonide/formoterol (BF group: 160/4.5 µg, one puff, twice daily), or montelukast plus budesonide/formoterol (MBF group) for 8 weeks. The primary outcomes were changes in the cough visual analogue scale (VAS) score, daytime cough symptom score (CSS) and night-time CSS, and the secondary outcomes comprised changes in cough reflex sensitivity (CRS), the percentage of sputum eosinophils (sputum Eos%) and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO). CRS was presented with the lowest concentration of capsaicin that induced at least 5 coughs (C5). The repeated measure was used in data analysis. RESULTS: The median cough VAS score (median from 6.0 to 2.0 in the M group, 5.0 to 1.0 in the BF group and 6.0 to 1.0 in the MBF group, all p < 0.001), daytime CSS (all p < 0.01) and night-time CSS (all p < 0.001) decreased significantly in all three groups after treatment for 8 weeks. Meanwhile, the LogC5 and sputum Eos% improved significantly in all three groups after 8 weeks treatment (all p < 0.05). No significant differences were found in the changes of the VAS score, daytime and night-time CSSs, LogC5 and sputum Eos% among the three groups from baseline to week 8 (all p > 0.05). The BF and MBF groups also showed significant decreases in FeNO after 8 weeks treatment (p = 0.001 and p = 0.008, respectively), while no significant change was found in the M group (p = 0.457). Treatment with MBF for 8 weeks significantly improved the FEV1/FVC as well as the MMEF% pred and decreased the blood Eos% (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Montelukast alone, budesonide/formoterol alone and a combination of both were effective in improving cough symptom, decreasing cough reflex sensitivity and alleviating eosinophilic airway inflammation in patients with CVA, and the antitussive effect and anti-eosinophilic airway inflammation were similar. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01404013.

[Pharmacoeconomics analysis of using a fixed combination of budesonide/formoterol in patients with asthma in the health care system of the Russian Federation].

AIM: To evaluate the budgetary impact of using budesonide + formoterol (Symbicort Turbuhaler) as maintenance therapy in real clinical practice compared with standard therapy for asthma of varying severity: for mild asthma with on-demand salbutamol; for moderate and severe asthma with the drug salmeterol + fluticasone and salbutamol on demand. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A static mathematical model was built to assess the impact on the budget when introducing the drug budesonide + formoterol (Symbicort Turbuhaler) in the treatment of asthma into clinical practice from the point of view of the state. Demographic data was taken from the official data of the Federal State Statistics Service. Direct medical costs included the cost of medicines, the cost of hospitalization of patients associated with the development of asthma exacerbations, and the cost of scheduled outpatient visits. Indirect costs considered the loss of GDP due to hospitalization of patients against the background of asthma exacerbations. A one-way sensitivity analysis was performed to confirm the robustness of the study results. RESULTS: Assessment of direct costs in the treatment of mild, moderate and severe asthma showed that a gradual increase in the proportion of patients receiving the drug budesonide + formoterol (Symbicort Turbuhaler) over the years to 5.5, 7.7 and 9.7% accordingly, led to an increase in the cost of pharmacotherapy over 3 years by 1.7 billion rubles, while direct non-drug costs associated with the treatment of complications that developed during the treatment of asthma decreased by 8.3 billion rubles. Thus, the reduction in total direct costs amounted to RUB 6.7 billion. At the same time, indirect costs decreased by 6.0 billion rubles. The total reduction in all costs (direct and indirect) when switching patients to budesonide + formoterol (Symbicort Turbuhaler) amounted to 12.5 billion rubles. In addition, the use of the drug budesonide + formoterol (Symbicort Turbuhaler) resulted in a decrease in the number of exacerbations: in the first year by 3137, in the second by 4393 and in the third by 5534 cases. A total of 13 064 asthma exacerbations were prevented over 3 years. CONCLUSION: Increasing the proportion of patients with asthma of varying severity receiving therapy with budesonide + formoterol (Symbicort Turbuhaler) will reduce the financial burden on both the healthcare system and the budgetary system.

Adherence and quality of life assessment in patients with asthma treatment with budesonide/formoterol via the Elpenhaler device: the COMPLETE study.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways that causes recurring episodes of wheezing, breathlessness, chest tightness and coughing. Inhaled drugs on a daily basis are the cornerstone of asthma treatment, therefore, patient adherence is very important. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, open, non-interventional, observational, prospective study of 716 adult patients diagnosed with asthma receiving FDC (Fixed-dose combination) budesonide/formoterol via the Elpenhaler device. We assessed the adherence to treatment at 3 and 6 months (based on the MMAS-8: 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale), the quality of life and change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) from baseline to follow-up. RESULTS: Approximately 80% of the patients showed medium to high adherence throughout the study. The mean (SD) MMAS-8 score at 6 months was 6.85 (1.54) and we observed a statistically significant shift of patients from the low adherence group to the high adherence group at 6 months. Moreover, after 6 months of treatment with FDC budesonide/formoterol, we observed an increase in the patients' quality of life that as expressed by a change 2.01 (95%CI 1.93-2.10) units in Mini AQLQ (p < 0.0001) that was more pronounced in the high adherence group. The same trend was also observed in terms of spirometry (mean FEV1 2.58 L (0.85) at the end of the study, increased by 220 mL from baseline) with a higher improvement in the medium and high adherence groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with FDC of budesonide/formoterol via the Elpenhaler device was associated with improvement in asthma-related quality of life and lung function over 6 months that were more prominent in patients with higher adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: 2017-HAL-EL-74 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03300076).

[Fixed combination of budesonide, formoterol, glycopyrronium for the treatment of severe COPD : Trixeo Aerosphere®]. / Le médicament du mois. Combinaison fixe budésonide, formotérol, glycopyronium pour le traitement de la BPCO modérée à sévère : Trixeo Aerosphère®.

Here we present pharmacological and clinical properties of a new fixed triple inhaled combination including an inhaled corticoid, a long acting ?2 agonist and a long acting anticholinergic for the treatment of severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Trixeo Aerosphere® is the name of this triple combination which contains 160 µg budesonide, 4,8 µg formoterol and 9 µg glycopyrronium delivered by a pMDI. As compared to a budesonide/formoterol combination, Trixeo Aerosphere® improves forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1). As compared to glycopyrronium/formoterol combination, Trixeo Aerosphere® reduces exacerbation rate, improved quality of life and most importantly reduces mortality with a benefit increasing with blood eosinophil count. Trixeo Aerosphere® 320/18/9.6 is delivered twice daily 2 inhalations and is indicated in moderate to severe COPD insufficiently controlled by LABA/LAMA (long-acting ?2-adrenergic receptor agonist/ long-acting ?2-muscarinic receptor agonist) or ICS/LABA (inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ?2-adrenergic receptor agonist).

Nous présentons dans cet article les propriétés pharmacologiques et les effets cliniques d'une nouvelle triple combinaison fixe inhalée comprenant un corticoïde inhalé, un ?2 mimétique à longue durée d'action et un anticholinergique à longue durée d'action, destinée au traitement de la bronchopneumopathie chronique obstructive (BPCO) sévère. Cette combinaison qui porte le nom de Trixeo Aerosphere® regroupe, dans le même dispositif, 160 µg de budésonide, 4,8 µg de formotérol et 18 µg de glycopyrronium. Par rapport à une combinaison budésonide/formotérol, le Trixeo Aerosphere® améliore la valeur du volume expiratoire maximum par seconde (VEMS). Par rapport à une combinaison formotérol/glycopyrronium, le Trixeo Aerosphere® réduit la fréquence des exacerbations et réduit la mortalité avec un bénéfice qui augmente avec le taux des éosinophiles circulants. Le Trixeo Aerosphere®, à la dose de 2X2 bouffées/24h, est indiqué dans le traitement des patients BPCO modérés à sévères insuffisamment contrôlés par une bithérapie LABA/LAMA (long-acting ?2-adrenergic receptor agonist/ long-acting ?2-muscarinic receptor agonist) ou ICS/LABA (inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ?2-adrenergic receptor agonist).

A Practical Guide to Implementing SMART in Asthma Management.

The use of a single inhaler containing the combination of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and formoterol, a specific long-acting bronchodilator, for both maintenance and quick relief therapy (single maintenance and reliever therapy [SMART or MART]) is recommended by both the Global Initiative for Asthma and the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee in steps 3 and 4 of asthma management. This article provides practical advice about implementing SMART in clinical practice based on evidence and clinical experience. Fundamental to SMART is that ICS-formoterol provides quick relief of asthma symptoms similar to that of short-acting ß2-agonists such as albuterol, while reducing the risk for severe asthma exacerbations and at an overall lower ICS exposure. Most SMART clinical trials were in adults and adolescents (aged ≥12 years), using budesonide-formoterol 160/4.5 µg (delivered dose), one inhalation once or twice daily (step 3) and two inhalations twice daily (step 4). For both steps 3 and 4, patients take additional inhalations of budesonide-formoterol 160/4.5 µg, one inhalation whenever needed for symptom relief, up to a maximum for adults and adolescents of 12 total inhalations in any single day (delivering 54 µg formoterol). The efficacy and safety of SMART with budesonide-formoterol and beclometasone-formoterol have been confirmed, but other ICS-long-acting bronchodilator combinations have not been studied. The SMART regimen should be introduced with a careful explanation of its role in self-management, preferably with a customized written asthma action plan. The cost to patients and the availability of SMART treatment will depend on the prescribed dose and national or local payer agreements.

SMART therapy in adolescent and adults patients with moderate persistent asthma: a cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent asthma guidelines, recommends for persistent asthma as first alternative low dose inhaled budesonide-formoterol maintenance and reliever over fixed combination of low doses inhaled corticosteroids - long-acting beta-agonist, or fixed-dose inhaled corticosteroids. Concerns arise as to which of the proposed alternatives has the best possible cost-effectiveness profile. This study aimed to assess the health and economic consequences of SMART, fixed combination, and fixed-dose inhaled corticosteroids in patients with moderate-severe persistent asthma. METHODS: A probabilistic Markov model was created to estimate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of patients with persistent asthma. Total costs and QALYs of SMART, fixed combination, and fixed-dose inhaled corticosteroids were calculated over a lifetime horizon. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated at a willingness-to-pay value of $19,000. RESULTS: The model suggests a potential gain of 1.27 and 1.34 QALYs per patient per year on SMART respect to fixed combination and fixed-dose ICS respectively. We observed a reduction of US$4 in total discounted cost per person-year on SMART with respect to fixed combination and US$0.1 respect to fixed-dose ICS. In the deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, our base-case results were robust to variations of all assumptions and parameters. CONCLUSION: SMART therapy was found to be cost-effective regarding fixed combination and fixed-dose inhaled corticosteroids. This evidence supports the use of SMART therapy in Colombia and must to be replicated in others middle-income countries.